Not sure I understand the use of "forked" here. Solr needed CSV handing. Rather than just roll our own, I looked at commons-csv and put a *lot* of time and effort into improving it. I didn't have time to follow through with a complete release of commons-csv, so we just included a snapsot in Solr. It's an internal implementation detail, and hopefully you'll all agree that commons-csv has benefited. There have been *no* custom additions or anything else - it's just a snapshot.
Of course with the whole maven thing it almost makes it almost look like a release. I'm not a maven guy (and I don't particularly care for it). If there's something wrong with the maven config, hopefully you can explain that to the Lucene/Solr maven guys. To me, it's simply an implementation detail within solr and definitely shouldn't be advertised as any kind of official release on it's own. ps: I'm away for the week in Korea w/ limited internet access, so I'll most likely be unable to respond personally to any followups. -Yonik lucenerevolution.com - Lucene/Solr Open Source Search Conference. Boston May 7-10 On Mon, Mar 5, 2012 at 8:12 PM, Emmanuel Bourg <ebo...@apache.org> wrote: > Hi, > > This is actually a bad joke for all of us binary compatibility lovers. I > just noticed that Solr forked Commons CSV and released it as a separate > artifact, but kept the org.apache.commons.csv package unchanged :( > > http://www.jarvana.com/jarvana/inspect/org/apache/solr/solr-commons-csv/3.5.0/solr-commons-csv-3.5.0.jar > > Not a very pleasant discovery. I don't know how to handle this yet. > > Emmanuel Bourg > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
